Tax morale and self-fulfilling beliefs

Should people like Richard Murphy be taxed more heavily than the likes of Tim Worstall?
There’s a simple reason to think so. The revenue-maximizing tax rate will depend on, among other things, people’s attitudes to tax.
If you think taxes are state-sanctioned theft used to line the pockets of idiots, tyrants and con-men you'll be likely to try to avoid tax by retiring, emigrating, exploiting legal loopholes, cooking the books or whatever. This means a high tax rate will in fact be expensive; it will lead to a loss of revenue and GDP and to high compliance costs as governments employ lots of tax men to chase down evaders.
If, however, you think, with Oliver Wendell Holmes, that tax is the price we pay for a civilized society, then you‘ll be more willing to pay and so a high tax rate will be feasible.
This means the optimal tax rate depends upon tax morale. The happier people are to pay tax, the higher is the optimal tax rate. A society of Murphys, then, would have a higher optimal tax than a society of Worstalls.
The empirical evidence bears this out. A new paper shows that, controlling for income, “groups with high tax morale systematically face higher average and marginal tax rates.”
Now, I’m not advocating that individuals should be taxed according to their political views; this has obvious drawbacks.
Instead, the point is that the response of tax revenues to tax rates - the shape of the Laffer curve - is not a primitive, fundamental datum. Instead, it depends upon tax morale. A rise in tax morale shifts the Laffer curve right, a fall shifts it left.
For this reason, Tim is not quite right to say that we’ll find out whether the 50p tax rate raises revenues when this year’s self-assessment returns are analyzed. Instead, the revenue response to higher taxes is subject to the Duhem-Quine problem. It tells us about a joint hypothesis - the interaction of tax rates and tax morale - not a single one.
Let’s imagine the numbers were to show that the 50p rate has led to a reduction in tax revenue. The left could reply that this shows not that taxes are too high, but rather that tax morale is too low. Years of neoliberal ideology - and declining trust in government - have increased people’s willingness to dodge taxes, they might say.
Conversely, if it appears that the 50p rate has led to increased revenues, libertarians might say that this just shows that people are still duped by statist ideology into a supine acceptance of high taxes.
In other words, we have a problem of multiple belief equilibria. If people believe that high tax rates are acceptable then they will be consistent with high revenues. And if they don’t, they won’t.
In other words, ideologies can be self-fulfilling. Anti-statist ideology leads to lower tax morale and so the claim that high taxes are damaging becomes self-fulfilling. And conversely, statist ideology raises tax morale and thus optimal tax rates.

Related

Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog, “Taxes are what we pay for civilized society.” The famous quote by US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. is inscribed above the entrance to the headquarters of the Internal Revenue Service.

I recently tried to defend the 50p tax rate. There is, though, a counter-argument to this which nobody’s mentioned, but which might be interesting. It’s all to do with fairness norms. We know from ultimatum game experiments that people often reject actions that are in their self-interest, if they regard them as unfair.

High earners are internationally mobile, and so will emigrate if taxes are too high. Because of this, tax increases actually reduce revenue. So goes the standard rightist claim. However, a new paper (pdf) suggests it is plain wrong.

Submitted by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,
In a bizarre story disclosed over the weekend, we learned that Belgium’s Princess Astrid was robbed by two assailants on a motorbike.
The thieves apparently approached her while she was sitting in traffic, smashed in her window, snatched the Royal Handbag, and sped off with over 2,000 euros in cash.

The coalition’s confusion over its plan to remove child benefit from people in the 40% tax band raises an issue that all politicians would rather ignore: namely, the structure of marginal taxes.
The problem with withdrawing child benefit is that someone earning just under £42,745 faces a massive marginal tax rate because she would lose child benefit if she gets a pay rise.

When I was an undergraduate studying tax policy, I remember John Bulloch’s vicious attack on Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s tax reform package, which was particularly threatening to small businesses and investors. Bulloch, head of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, was successful in paring back proposals that would have squeezed many Canadian entrepreneurs hard. As a result, the CFIB developed a very large membership and became one of the most powerful advocacy groups in Ottawa.

Submitted by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute, Recently, Republican leaders in Congress unveiled a "tax reform" plan that they claimed would provide the American people with a simpler, fairer, and more efficient tax system. While this plan does lower some tax rates and contains some other changes that may make next April a little less painful for Americans, there is little in it to excite supporters of liberty.